Levshathat story is a complete fiction.
And it wouldn’t surprise me, that’s why I said ‘alleged’.
In fact I hear a lot of dissenting voices who claim that no Eritrean MiG-29 was ever shot down by Ethiopian Flankers.
Russia and the former Soviet states don’t allow women to fly combat aircraft?
I don’t recall ever seeing, in the media, any female combat/non-combat pilots in the air arms in the countries of the Former Soviet Union, so I’d almost presume there aren’t any.
In the second world war, yes.
The main reason why there were female combat pilots in the Soviet air forces in the second world war was due to the fact that there were so many female civilian pilots who were trained in the Soviet Union prior the war and consequently allowed to become combat pilots during the war after heavy losses were suffered among the male pilots.
This also meant that the average female pilot was a more experienced flyer than her typical male counterpart, and I don’t believe there were any female pilots actually trained from ‘ab initio’ during the war.
I recommend reading this book on the subject:
http://www.amazon.com/Dance-Death-Soviet-Airwomen-World/dp/1585441775
What can you comment us on the flight profile of the EtAF Su-27’s pilots?, from what aircraft they went?, how many hours did they fly? where did they trained?.
http://www.acig.org has a lot of info on the Ethiopian- Eritrean war of the late nineties – Eritrean MiG-29s were supplied from Ukraine and flown by Ukrainian pilots. The Ethiopian Su-27s were supplied from Russia and were flown, naturally, by Russian pilots, if I recall.
LevshaDoes anyone know how many are there by countries that operate SU-27/SU-30 Flankers?
Well, the Ethiopian Su-27, which was alleged to have shot down the Eritrean MiG-29 in the late 90s was said to have been flown by a woman, but as regards those airforces, which operate the Su-27/30, such as India, China, Russia, Belarus, etc, I don’t think most of them actually allow women to fly combat aircraft.
Although the former Soviet Union had a habit of using women to carry out FAI record breaking attempts – the Il-18 distance record and Ka-27 helicopter speed records spring to mind – I doubt if there were any female record breakers flying the Su-27…
LevshaCan’t find any mention of this ‘plane’ before which is surprising as it has cost $63 million so far in the twenty three years it has been in the planning stage. Guess it helps to have friends in high places although they seem to be fewer of them now.
Where have I seen this aircraft before… oh yeah, the Yak-36 from 1964.:confused: 😮
The DP-2 seems to use the exact same layout for it’s VTOL ability as the Yak, with the thrust from the 2 jet engines exiting somewhere underneath the pilot’s feet from 2 side-by-side vectoring nozzles.
Mind you, the DP-2 uses high bypass turbofans – so it might burn smaller holes in the tarmac than the Yak during take off and landing.:rolleyes:
But the Yak looks a lot cooler… and retro.:cool:
Levshacome to think of it there was a guy there who said rcs of f-22 in worst case scenario is 0,3m2……hmmm i wonder could it be our dear comrad LEVSHA?
Hmmm I wonder how he could have the first friggin’ clue. :rolleyes:
sferrin
Too right, I wouldn’t have the first “friggin'” clue about the RCS of the F-22… and I have never pretended that I could comment on the RCS of the Raptor and I have never done so!:mad:
That probably shouldn’t stop me or anyone else from quoting someone else’s estimate if we wanted to though, does it?
Who, on this forum feels qualified to comment on the Raptor’s RCS anyway?:rolleyes: :rolleyes:
LevshaF-15’s FF was 1971. Hence battle experience from Vietnam was only partly included. Shortcomings really became apparent in the operation rolling thunder, but ~5 years is a bit short to develop a new aircraft from the scratch.
The final specifications for the USAF’s FX fighter proposal (which became the F-15) were eventually finalised in 1968, by which time American aircraft had been engaging Vietnamese MiGs for around 4 years already – enough time for the USAF to adapt the requirements for the FX proposal in the light of new lessons.
I am reading:
Coram, Robert. Boyd: The Fighter Pilot Who Changed the Art of War. New York: Little, Brown, 2002.
26th July 2007 17:03
…and this book is available online at no expense here:
http://www.d-n-i.net/fcs/boyd_thesis.htm
Ooops, edit, this is a different piece of work, written by a Major Cowan – but well worth a read anyway.
LevshaThe whole work is said to remain confidential. Nonetheless it looks like the Russians, and everyone else, would have arrived to these concepts sooner or later.
And how would the Russians have arrived at these concepts later?:confused:
It was only because of many years’ hard won experience in the Vietnam War that forced the Americans to think seriously about the nature and future of aerial warfare including a-to-a combat.
This serious “thinking” led to far more WVR capable aircraft such as the F-15/16/18 – but never the less, the Americans still laid primary stress in BVR techniques which may be why they found the Sidewinder’s replacement, the ‘AIM-95’ too expensive and didn’t bother with it, while expending great resources on BVR missiles, improved AIM-7s, AIM-120 etc…
The Soviets, on the other hand, have had very little experience of “aircraft on aircraft” combat, apart from the odd South Korean airliner, and they don’t seem to have developed a great body of theory to fall back on. There are half a dozen or more countries in the world who had gained more modern air combat experience during the Cold War than the Soviets did.
Certainly most of their combat aircraft seem to be designed to conform to any great aerial warfare theories, but instead seem to be designed with the singular purpose of being able to take on particular NATO aircraft types: MiG-25 v A-12/B-70, MiG-23 v F-4…
Is it true that all USAF aircraft were inferior to Russian at that time (mid 1960s)?
Schorsch; you know the answer to that…:rolleyes:
LevshaThe E2D radar is AESA
No, I’m sure it’s PESA too, but still designed to rotate within its dome.
LevshaThe Tanks had a limiting speed of something in excess of 550 kts. We carried a centerline tank in Viet Nam and I usually got about 550 to 600 kts on pull outs over in Indian country. My patented way to stay alive in Laos, or Cambodia was never below 550 kts below 10,000 ft. Seems to have worked…
I believe the ingress speed into the target zone for the A-4 was at least 100 knots slower than for the F-105 or F-4, which is quite a difference and must have been a disadvantage over Vietnam.
Not common knowledge, but the MiG-15 and MiG-15bis could not pass Mach 1 in a dive prevented by its wing, when the MiG-17 could do so, thanks to its new wing.
A greater disadvantage of the MiG-15’s wing was in fact the much poorer gun aiming stability at higher mach speeds, compared to the F-86, which greatly effected shooting accuracy.
A BAe Hawk can dive to supersonic, when a similar Alpha Jet can do not, also prevented by its wing.
It makes you wonder what advantages the Alpha Jet’s wing might have brought to the aircraft’s performance that would be found to be inferior in the Hawk – if we presume that designing an aircraft (and their wings) is nothing more than choosing the right compromise in the various aspects in flight performance.
Perhaps the Alpha Jet has better airfield performance or payload carrying ability?
Levsha….well we did…
If it’s the 1939 winter war you’re referring to, well yes, we all admire Finland’s military abilities and bravery during that war – but I ask you this question, how would the Finnish Government have responded if their country was invaded by not only the Soviet Union but also by Sweden, Norway and the Baltic States at the same time and from multiple directions? How long would Finnish resistance have lasted in such a case? This was the situation facing Czechoslovakia in 1968.
Also a full fletched war inside warsav pact would have had great effact on the cold war and I doupt NATO could have sit idle and just watch
Well what you’re suggesting there is nothing less than the outbreak of World War 3 and nuclear armageddon, and I think the only people in the world who wanted that may well have been a minority in Eastern Europe – but very few people in Finland I should think.
LevshaHmm perhaps a bit offtopic and risky to ask, But as for the 1968 events, I have always wondered why didnt the Checks figth back? Were there any change for it? What where the main and biggest reason for Checkoslovakian army to be paralyzed so easily? Or is there any explanation to it?
I dont want to be distrespectfull to Checkoslovakians people or claim that it was their fault, but just curious over the reasons that made the whole mess possible
Against the Russians?!:eek:
The Chechens fought back, look at what happened to them!
The Afghans also fought back in the 1980s, look at what happened to them too!
In fact there were many resistance movements in many countries of Europe under Soviet occupation throughout the 1940s and 1950s. In nearly every case the resistance was eventually crushed by Soviet forces, often with great loss of life – why would the Czechs and Slovaks be any more successful?:rolleyes:
LevshaBy was of a side thread am I the only one who sees a similarity between the F104 and the U2? Blunt the F104s nose and stretch its wings massivley, hey presto.
That doesn’t sound like a bad suggestion at all. The U2 was originally supposed to have a development of the Starfighter optimised for high altitude long range recon flights. Whether the finalised U2 design actually employs any components of the F-104 I’m not sure.
LevshaSurely the fly by wire system wouldn’t have allowed them to deploy just one thrust-reverser? I’d have thought that in the event of one reverser being disabled, they’d have taken them both offline to prevent asymmetric thrust from causing the aircraft to lose control. :confused:
From what I have read about the Sibir airlines accident in Irkusk, the A310 is actually cleared to land with only one reverser working, so I presume it’s the same for the A320.
– strange I know…
LevshaTAM have annouced that the right engine’s thrust reverser was “deactivated” at the time of the accident.
Well, that’s an interesting fact.
When reading about this recent tragedy in Sao Paulo I‘m reminded of the Sibir Airlines accident in Irkusk, Russia almost exactly a year ago.
Quite a few parallels.
An Airbus (A310) overshoots the runway on landing during rain and runs into buildings located too close to the end of the runway. Many people killed. It seems that one of the thrust reversers was out of order but the crew still had power applied through that engine as they where trying to slow the aircraft on the runway, the Airbus failed to slow down sufficiently and over-ran the runway at 80km/h.
http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20060709-0
LevshaWell, if they ever decide to purchase a figher which they intend to operate for extended periods over seawater, they should probably want to go for a twin engined aircraft for the better reliability and the pilot’s peace of mind – this would rule out the Gripen and F-16 though.
Perhaps the F/A-18 or MiG-29 would be preferred, or even the F-5E.
LevshaWhoa, ok what happened here- anyone?
That was the crash of the Yak-141 on the Admiral Gorshkov in October 1991 while in a hover before touchdown.
I posted this video already a few weeks back (let me know if it doesn’t work for you):
http://san.siberia.net/tambovwolf/damage.wmv
taken from here
Sign In
